Lin Evans

Hi Bernardo, I wish I had an easy answer for you - I'm not certain why the Youtube output was of such low pixel size. Video Builder can output "very" high quality to Youtube. I used to have some 1600x1200 samples on Youtube which were output directly from PTE to Youtube. Since your production is built in 5:4 aspect ratio, using the HD 1080p output would crop off the top and bottom so you really don't want to chose either of those. Instead, choose the Custom and set the resolution to a higher figure with 5:4 aspect ratio. This could be variously 800x600, 1024x768 or 1600x1200. Realize that if you choose 1600x1200, the "probability" is that your viewers will have to pause the output at Youtube immediately after it starts then wait until the buffering gives a decent head start before proceeding. Youtube will actually "convert" the MP4 h.264 to a proprietary high quality Flash show, but it will be virtually indistinguishable from the original at 1600x1200. If you choose 1024x768 it doesn't get converted to HD by Youtube for what ever reason, so to get true HD you either must redo the show cropped to the 1080 or 720 formats or use 1200x1600. It's entirely possible that the demo version of Video Builder doesn't output the full resolution. I can't check that because I have purchased multiple copies for my own computers and they are all full deluxe version. Again, if you want to test it before you buy Video Builder, just link me to your zipped PTE file and I'll output a 1600x1200 which you can then download and subsequently upload to Youtube to try it for yourself. p.s. Here's a link to one of my shows on Youtube which I think can be run in HD.... http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=grPvnD2nubM&vq=hd1080 Best regards, Lin

Hi B, (is there a better name - maybe first name?) I couldn't get the downloaded video file to play for me at all, so I can't comment on it. I was able to see the exe just fine. The "best" quality video is going to be an MP4 h.264 created with PTE. It will be MUCH larger in size that the exe file. If you will zip up your PTE files using the internal zip feature (file - create backup in zip) and post that and a link for me, I'll create an MP4 of it and link you to it. You need Video Builder to do this. The Deluxe version of PTE includes Video Builder and is well worth the additional small cost. AVI files will "never" be equal in quality and there is always the issue of people trying to play them without the proper codec. MP4 h.264 is a far superior distribution mode. With no more animation than you have in your intro exe, the MP4 will be virtually identical to the exe. Best regards, Lin

Hi Mick, The PTE codec is only intended for temporary use while exporting data to a DVD so is relatively uncompressed and not suitable for a stand-alone AVI file. He "probably" will be able to use the MP4 file without incident, but in the event you need to make an AVI if you will report on the Codecs available on your system when you press the "down" arrow to choose a different codec, perhaps we can help you decide which is best for your intended purpose. The exact codecs available on your system will depend on other software you may have installed, or on codec "Packs" you might have installed. I would assume that you haven't installed any codec packs since you related that you were not "up on video codecs." Usually you will find one or more Microsoft video codecs available and they are usually a safe choice. Whether or not he will be able to "play" the AVI will depend on whether or not his system has the ability to decode (has the codec installed) or which "player" he may be using which may have the codec built in. Best regards, Lin

Hi Jean, I believe that the new unsharp mask feature is an "option" which can be selected or not. If I'm wrong - perhaps Igor can correct me. If it is optional by ticking a box, etc., then we could choose not to use it and everything would remain as it is now. Then if circumstances deem it necessary we have the choice of applying it universally, but could "tone it down" if desired. What isn't clear is whether reducing the amount, etc., would be applicable to individual slides or would apply necessarily to "all" slides? Best regards, Lin

Hi Mick, Yes, you can. First, click on the "create custom AVI Video File" button. Then from the changed screen click on the Video Codec tab and choose one of the available codecs other than the PTE default. Next choose the width, height and frames per second (FPS) desired. If you have Video Builder you may just want to send him an mp4 rather than an AVI? Best regards, Lin

Hi Alex, Go back and set everything to "linear." Then change to "smooth" on one of the keyframes, then go to "setting up" and click each of the "seperate here" points. This will then set all keyframes to smooth for that object or slide. If you don't do this, the results may be uncertain. It's best to program everything in "linear" then after all the timings, etc., are correct, go set up "smooth" and use the "setting up," etc. Do this for all of the animation possibilities to be on the safe side. Even if you don't have any "rotate" or "pan" if you "accidentally" move an image during the size, for example, the "pan" will be affected. If you accidentally rotate only a degree, the "rotate" will be affected. There is no "penalty" for setting smooth on all three even if they are not used in your animation. It's safe "insurance" against unexpected results. Best regards, Lin

Hi Jose, First let me say that I don't believe I have ever enjoyed a slideshow more than this one! You have done an exemplary job in every respect. From an artistic perspective, I wouldn't change a thing - it's perfect the way it is. From a technical perspective, you might consider using the "mip mapping" (anti-shimmer) on some of the sharper images for zoom to minimize the "shimmer." and perhaps turn off the mouse cursor for the entire show so that users who accidentally move the mouse don't see the cursor appear during the production. Congratulations on an incredibly good job! Best regards, Lin

Hi Paul, Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with Dreamweaver's capabilities. If there is no provision for using MP4, the alternative would be to convert your output to Flash. There are some free Flash converters out there and Flash works pretty well for the most part. There are two types of Flash output files and if your show is longer than about 3 minutes and has synchronized sound, it's usually better to convert to Flash FLV. This is because Flash SWF can't reliably sync sound for more than a couple minutes. The added benefit of FLV is that you can also add a preload so that a certain amount of the show is downloaded before playback begins. This helps assure that the viewer won't have undesirable starts and stops while file is buffering. Slower connects (non-broadband and slower DSL) can't always keep up with data feed. The preload helps greatly with this. The downside of playing an MP4 h.264 directly via a player like the one with Xara Web Developer 6 is that to my knowledge, there is no way to buffer or preload. This means that the user with a less than optimal bandwidth must start the show then immediately pause and wait for the "gas gage" to advance a few inches. This "manual buffering" then helps insure an uninterrupted playback. The up side of the Xara WD6 is that you need take no intermediate step and it only takes a couple minutes to create the complete code to upload to your site and it works wonderfully with excellent quality. The $49 price is about what you would pay for a medium quality Flash converter so it's pretty much a toss up. If Dreamweaver lets you simply drop in a Flash show and immediately outputs the code for your site, then perhaps the Flash converter might still be your best bet. Of course you still have the additional step, but it's still perhaps a more elegant solution. With the Xara WD6 approach you would simply upload the code to a folder on your website then simply "link" an image or text on your site to play the MP4. You would also need a link to return to the site from the MP4. Sorry I don't have an answer for you about directly embedding the MP4 in Dreamweaver, but I don't do that much web development any more so am not current on the top-end tools like Dreamweaver. Best regards, Lin

Just a little more information about sharpening in general. There are actually three types of "sharpening" commonly used for photography. The first two: USM (Unsharp Mask) and Sharpening share the common characteristic of adjacent pixel contrast enhancement. What makes USM differ from generalized "sharpening": is that with USM only the edges of outlines of detail are affected. The distance from these edges are adjusted via the "radius" adjustment. With generalized "sharpening" all pixels are affected rather than just the pixels outlining larger detail areas. Why do we use one rather than the other? Because at times, we want to sharpen only certain areas of an image such as with a portrait. Perhaps we want to bring out the eyes, lips and perhaps hair but keep the skin softer to minimize the appearance of skin blemishes, etc. Or we may want to sharpen only the central portion of a flower and leave the outer petals softer. To do this we use the selection tool in our software such as Photoshop and apply USM or Sharpening (depending on the results desired) to only those areas we have selected. The third type of sharpening is deconvolution. Deconvolution involves actually moving and removing pixels to obtain a true sharpening effect at the edges of detail objects. For example, were we to photograph a deep black object void of surface features such as a piece of black, smooth plastic against a pure white larger object also devoid of surface features, and we were to examine the photograph at the pixel level, we would see that at the junction where the detail of the black met the background of white, there would be not an abrupt pure white pixel beside a pure black one. What we would see instead, is a gradient of pure white to gray to pure black which would be composed of, depending on the camera used, around five pixels in the transition. What deconvolution does, in effect, is to change this gradient to a steeper one having perhaps three or even only two pixels in the transition. This process actually does truly "sharpen" the adjacent borders of detail objects. But deconvolution is not nearly as "striking" a change visually as USM or Sharpening because both USM and sharpening effectively create a slight but perceptible "boundary" around the detail which consists of contrasting pixels. Think of painting yellow letters on a red background. Now imagine painting a faint outline of black around each letter. Doing so sets off the letters and makes them look "sharper" to the human eye. This is a rather simplified explanation, but essentially what happens with USM and sharpening. The difference is in degree and extent. Ideally, a combination of USM and deconvolution can be used to really improve the appearance or sharpness of a photo. Deconvolution has the added benefit of actually being able to correct for a degree of motion blur. As Igor said, when a photo is resized either up or down using bicubic interpolation, a degree of softening is inherent in the process. So, ideally one would adjust their image and do localized USM and/or deconvolution on the main features of the original. Then when the image is resized by PTE, the USM when applied by PTE will correct only for the changes created by the resizing process. Best regards, Lin

Congratulations Igor! That's a significant (and as far as i know a "Unique") feature which isn't shared by any other slideshow software!! This is a major step for super high quality output for your program which already outclasses anything else available for image quality. Best regards, Lin

One of the interesting things to me about PTE is the amazing power to combine various techniques and animated sequences and render the output using the significantly strong tools such as 3D transform. Once the Video clip drop-in is available, I believe we will be able to use it very much as I have used animated GIF's in this demo. Lin's Animated Sleep-Aid Cube - Guaranteed to put you to sleep or your money back - LOL... http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/xample/sleepaidcubepc.zip (about 9 meg) http://www.learntomakeslideshows.net/xample/sleepaidcubemac.zip (about 9 meg) Lin

see above, Lin

Hi Xaver, Couple questions: How do you know the sequences of images were "randomly chosen?" What is a "typical pose?" - typical for what? Just asking.... Would you prefer undressed male humans, or perhaps naked chickens - LOL... Best regards, Lin

Hi BB, There are a number of issues you need to consider. First, for the brief time your show ran, the memory size was pretty large so you may want to use smaller images in terms of initial size. For example, if you are going to show the slides on an HD TV, the only reason for them to be larger than 2 megapixels is if you are doing deep zooms, etc. So first resample the originals and save in no larger than 1600x1200 pixels. The second thing is that "if" precise position is essential, then you want to keep all the excess "transparency" surrounding the image for the PNG. That way the alignment will be automatically perfect. Otherwise you will have the issue of trying to resize the png's and precisely position them. That takes lots of time. The next issue is, if you want the image left behind the png cutout to look normal, then you will want to remove the subject from the original after creating the PNG. This way, you can clone over the area left from the cutout and use a cutout with much smaller overall file size. You can then remove the excess transparency thus making the memory load "much" smaller for your show. If you have Photoshop or a similar program, it should be fairly easy to clone background trees, grass, whatever, over the area where the subject originally was. Then your cutout can be sized and placed in the approximate original position and when it moves, what is left behind will look normal. The only reason to use frames for what you are doing is if you want to move two or more png cutouts simultaneously. Otherwise there is no real advantage. If you could verbally explain exactly what you want to accomplish with the png cutouts, perhaps I could suggest the best way to proceed. Best regards, Lin

Actually you "can" do this with PTE, but it's not straight forward and you have to ask yourself if you really "want" to do it with PTE? To accomplish this you would need to first load the song twice. Next set the ending time for the first iteration of the song to where you want to splice it. Next set the beginning of the second iteration to the time where the song resumes. It's not a very satisfactory way of dealing with a silence and would be "much" better to take the selection into Audacity where you could precisely cut out the silence. Best regards, Lin

Very nice use of artistic graphics with excellent photos and presentation - well done! Best regards, Lin

Hi Guys, Thanks! The interesting thing is that with the powers of PTE, we can actually do things with some of the animated GIF's which go beyond their native animated scope. For example, with Sqirlz Water Reflections, it's possible to get a rippling water effect (sort of a sloshing reflection effect) or you can have little circular spreading ripples as if rain drops were falling on still water, etc. You can have rain or snow effects with either of these, but you can't have the "sloshing" reflection AND the little circular ripples together. However, with PTE it's very easy to create two animated GIF files and combine them with variable opacity to get the desired effect not possible with either original. Likewise with animated text such as we can get from XARA. We can combine 3D transforms, flips, etc., and get much more from these animated GIF's than what they provide on their own by using the various masking, 3D Transform, variable opacity, parent/child relationships, etc. PTE is indeed an amazing tool for creating very sophisticated effects if one simply takes the time to learn to use it. Best regards, Lin

While we anxiously await the beta1 of PTE 7.0 with video clip capabilities, I thought perhaps that many haven't fully exploited the possibilities of animated GIF files. Though we generally think of animated GIF's as cute little animated clips which are rather simple and perhaps amateurish in nature, there are a few low cost as well as freeware programs which allow creation of more realistic type animated GIF files. Xara allows some really nice 3D text with professional animation and Squirlz Water Reflections allows some fairly realistic and useful water animations which can be sometimes nice when not overdone. Below is a sample using Squirlz Water Reflections. It took all of about 3 minutes to create including creation of the animated GIF's and the PTE program. I just set it to a Gordon Lightfoot tune I particularly like - have a look if you're inclined to.... http://www.learntoma...olfripplepc.zip (about 6.5 meg) http://www.learntoma...lfripplemac.zip (about 6.6 meg) Lin

Could you zip up your show using the PTE zip and post a link - I'll look and see what might be wrong. If the box is checked to allow keyboard (Project Options/Advanced Tab/Permit Control of Show Using Keyboard) it "should" allow that for an Executable show only. If you have created and played your show as an MP4 or other video format, this doesn't work. Best regards, Lin

Hi BB, Actually, I put a link on your question about frames, but here's a duplicate and I'll put on in the original above too: http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=7901 Scroll to the bottom to number 26 and click on the download link. It's a large file, about 360 megabytes and installs giving you the entire set of twelve AVI tutorials. Best regards, Lin

Hi BB, There are countless ways you can use Frames or Rectangles to you advantage in creating various animations with your pictures or with objects. In this sense, objects being a PNG transparency where only the subject is visible and whatever background there might be has been rendered transparent. Perhaps it might help you to download my free tutorials from the Tutorials and Articles section here: http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=7901 There is an AVI tutorial on Frames and Rectangles which can get you started. To address your immediate question, however, you are actually talking about a parent/child relationship. The image is not really "inside" a frame, but rather "attached" to the frame in a parent/child relationship. What this means is that you can manipulate the parent in terms of size, position, rotation, etc., and the child will follow the parent's lead. However, the child can also have its own animation within the parameters of the parent's animation. For example, if you were to separate the frame and image so that the image were in the bottom center of your monitor to start and the frame were in the center of the monitor. Create a keyframe at some point along the time line for both the frame and the image then set the rotation for the frame to 360 degrees the child "image" would rotate around the screen in a circular motion from the bottom to side to top to side to bottom. When the image was at the top of the monitor it would be upside down during the rotation, etc. But, if you were to set the rotation simultaneously for the "child image" so that it rotated in the opposite direction from the frame, the image would remain upright during its circle around the monitor. The above is only one of countless ways you can use frames. A rectangle might be considered as a "visible frame". They are quite similar in this respect. Being invisible, you can use the frame in countless creative ways to perform various actions. For example, you might assign some "action" such as to "exit" on a mouse click to the frame. Position the frame at the top right of the screen and make it large enough to cover say a quarter of the screen. Then any time some viewer clicked the mouse in the upper right quadrant of the screen, the slideshow would "exit." As for your question about not being able to "select" the frame, on the bottom right of the Objects and Animations screen, click on the "Tools" button and be certain that you have a checkmark beside "Ignore Objects Not Selected". Not having this checkmark may be responsible for the issue you are seeing. I think if you download my tutorial set (the last selection on the PTE Made Easy section) it may help you to understand many things about PTE which you may find helpful. Best regards, Lin

The PTE Tutorial set I formerly sold on my website is now available for free download on the Tutorials section of the forum under the PTE For Smarties/PTE Made Easy heading. Go to number 26 at the bottom of the first thread. The series is 12 lessons and though made back in the 5.0 era of PTE development, is still a good resource I think for those wanting to understand how PTE works and learn the basics. It's about a 360 meg download and is a self-installing Microsoft msi file Here's a convenience link: http://www.picturestoexe.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=7901 Scroll to the bottom beyond the "red numbers" to #26 and click on the download link.there. Best regards, Lin

Hi Linzi, Best to go to theDom's website - this series of posts are from 2009 so it may still be available there - hard to say. Dom has been ill and has not been on the forum for some time now. Here's a link to his site: http://www.thedom.fr/ Best regards, Lin

One of the problems with our newer technology is that Apple CEO, Steve Jobs, has decided to boycott Flash. What does this mean to you if you display your videos on your own website? It simply means that those who visit your site with an iPod or iPad, etc., which doesn't run Flash, will not be able to see your shows..... There is a solution now from Josh Anderson, who introduced the "Transparent Player" a while back. I commented on it then and am happy to report that there have been significant improvements to an already fine product. Now, when a visitor using an iPod or iPad, etc., comes to your website, your Flash slideshows can automatically be detected and played for them by a fallback to HTML5 which is included in the really neat little Transparent Player Josh sells. You can read all about it here: http://transparentplayer.com/ I think this offers the best overall solution at this time for those wanting to provide availability of their slideshows for everyone..... Best regards, Lin

Absolutely delightful! This had me rolling on the floor laughing!! Thanks, Lin